Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just had an email re the my breache in agreement by her rep.   I asked you yesterday if they had asked about her name in the thread being removed.   The issue they have is the Elizabeth turner and genetic pups entry on google.   they knew I did not put it up and told them so in court.  I dnt know how to post on google.   I told them I cannot remove what I did not post.  when i come back here and saw her name gone from threads title, I presumed her reps sought it.   now I get an email saying her names still on google ur breaching the agreement as it’s still on google.  
    • Peter McCormack says "ambition is big" and Real Bedford's attendances are increasing with promotions.View the full article
    • How does one obtain the permit? The permit team number is only open between the hours of 9am to 3pm Mon - Fri. It says on the website, To obtain an additional 2 hours, the driver must pay a tariff of £3.00 + booking fees in person at our Security Hut, is that how you get the permit also, from the security hut? What a rigmaroll that would be but maybe just another step to take to try and catch people out?
    • Anotheruser0000 bear in mind that not all Judges are equally versed in the PoFA regulations. Fortunately now most of them are but sometimes a Judge from a higher Court sits in who is well experienced  in Law but not PoFA. and so they sometimes go "offkey" because their knowledge can raise a different set of arguments and solutions. It does seem particularly unfair  when the decision is so  bad . it can also be that in some situations the motorist being a lay person is not sufficiently know ledgeable to be able to counter a Judge's decisions in a way that a barrister could.
    • The argument about the date of receipt is now dead because the PCN  does not comply with the wording  of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  First reason Section 9 [2] [e]  "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges;" Second Reason Section 9 [2][a] "specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;" All your PCN does is mark the time you entered and left the car park. It does not include all the myriad things you do in between-driving into the car park, looking for a parking space-perhaps a disabled space or  parent and Child place@ getting the children or disabled person out of the car then going shopping. Coming back; loading the car with shopping [, getting the children or disabled into the car, taking the trolley back to the store; driving to the exit perhaps stopping to let vehicles/pedestrians cross in front of you etc. so subtracting the driving times from before and after parking can make quite a difference from their time to the actual period parking time. So the upshot is now that only the driver is responsible for paying the PCN and the keeper is not liable at all even if the name of the driver is never known by Nexus so well done for not appealing. You obviously want to keep it that way to make it very difficult for them to win in Court if it ever goes that far. Although your question is now moot since  the same objective has been achieved by the non compliant PCN [ie no keeper liability] just  about the only way to dispute the timing of the PCN would be if one kept the envelope and there was a discernible date stamp on it that did not match the date on the PCN. There is a new Act coming out [and it cannot come quickly enough ] and one of the things required is that parking companies will have to prove the date of sending out their PCNs. We are not the only ones who sometimes doubt the veracity of their dates particularly as the later it is sent [unlawfully] the shorter the period motorists have to benefit [?] from the reduced payment. I haven't seen it on your posts but do you know how long you are permitted to park for free?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Bank has preempted my court action and is taking ME to court


m55dlc
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6043 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 2 weeks later...

And the plot thickens. I'm awaiting for judgement on my counterclaim after their claim was thrown out then out of the blue I get a pre-court questionnaire from Lloyds TSB over a different account, this time telling me that they will file for £490.00

 

Are these people stupid, or do they think they will intimidate me a second time. I've recalculated what they owe me and it is currently over £21,000.00. I am getting default notices removed following my last claim, this time I'm going for the whole lot - warts and all. I've sent them a letter that basically states if I hear anything else about this claim I will counterclaim for the whole amount, and will file a MoneyClaim anyway by the 10th January if not settled in full by that time.

 

My claim is for more than just charges, I've got fraud etc etc (see above). I actually want to go to court, this is not about the money anymore. They've made personal attacks and I will defend, I will also have the last laugh, irrespective of whether I win or loose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Retaliatory or stupid? Do they check their records before issuing more inane litigation? If I successfully defended a claim for £2650 less than a month ago, do they actually believe I wouldn't defend a claim for £490?

 

It beggars belief

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been reading this thread with great interest - the stupidity of these companies makes me laugh - they of course realise they are wrong and still try to intimidate!!

 

I know you'll defend and win this - so glad you won't back down and let these people have their own way!!

 

Goodluck - have a happy Christmas holiday I am sure you will battle on in the new year!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Right, time for an update:

 

LTSB sent me a nasty letter in December 2006 threatening court action over the £490.00 debt. I phoned Collections in Brighton and informed them of the situation. I said at that time that any moneyclaim filed against me will result in an immediate (10 minutes after receipt) counterclaim for over £21,000 including 3 breaches under the DPA, 3 breaches under the CCA and 1 count of theft, along with tampering with a computer system (not sure if this is just under the DPA or fraud as well). Bloke from LTSB wanted details of all of this, including evidence, but I told him no go. I also told him that I will file a moneyclaim for all of this anyway, when I get judgement on my counterclaim from the last moneyclaim they issued. LTSB has frozen action for a month pending further investigations (and we all know how thoroughly they investigate don't we!).

 

I hadn't received any response from my letter dated 11th December 2006 to Reading County Court asking for judgement on my counterclaim, so I called them on the 5th January 2007. The person I spoke to cited delays over the festive period and that the matter would be dealt with in a week or two. Yesterday I received the following response from the court:

 

'Upon reading a letter from the Defendant(s) dated 11th December 2006

 

WITHOUT NOTICE IT IS COMMENTED AND DIRECTED

 

- Any application for judgement on Counterclaim will have to be on notice, as the DETAILS of any order will have to be specified'

 

Now, if we go back a bit on this saga, I didn't send in any supporting documentation to the courts as LTSB ([problem]) failed to send in their AQ and I effectively won by default. Am I right in assuming the response from the court is an invitation to submit evidence? If this is so, what exactly do I need to send in? I've built up a few pieces from CAG, but a checklist (or pointers) would be greatly appreciated.

 

The saga continues to continue, but my sense of being wronged doesn't diminish

Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG:o

This thread is better than any Soap. Tracey can kill Charlie..Tom King is still dead, but this is holding my attention much more closely.

I am keeping everything crossed for you and watching with great interest.

dont drop off the site now...we are addicted.

GOOD LUCK.

Jo 'n' Mick.:grin::grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

M55DLC

I've been reading all your posts and am dead interested I,m taking the RBOS for a little bit more than you are taking Lloyds, I' like to throw in something to add to your pot.

The oft guide lines state that

1...a creditor should refrain from using one debt collector after the other

2...they have to give you notice that they intend to pass the debt on to a different debt collector,

3..because this amounts to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997

 

A county court has just awarded a woman £37 :000 for harassment by her mother in law under this Act, worth thinking about that.

 

Sparkie1723

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm still watching this with interest too as we are in similar circumstances. Though my own claim suffered a setback today as I was led to believe I would be getting judgement by default but now a hearing date has been allocated

All my posts are made without prejudice and may not be reused or reproduced without my express permission (or the permission of the forums owners)!

 

17/10/2006 Recieve claim against me from lloyds TSB for £312.82

18/10/06 S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent

03/02/07 Claim allocated to small claims. Hearing set for 15/05/07. Lloyds ordered to file statement setting out how they calculate their charges

15/05/07 Lloyds do not attend. Judgement ordered for £192 approx, £3 travel costs and removal of default notice

29/05/07 4pm Lloyds deadline for payment of CCJ expires. Warrant of execution ready to go

19/06/07 Letter from court stating Lloyds have made a cheque payment to court

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, just wanted to subscribe to this v.interesting thread and say good luck.

Likewise, and good luck with your claim

 

keep us posted!!!!!:)

Datxman v Lloyds TSB 2006 ** WON** 27/2/2006

With no conditions

Datxman v Capital One 2006

S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter sent - July 2006

Non-compliance letter sent - 11/09/2006

enforcement letter sent - 11/09/2006

Statements finally received - 27/09/06

Prelim Letter - sent 28/09/06 - £540

Lowell has bought the debt and I have asked them to wipe it clean due to lack of funds

Datxman v Barclaycard 2006

Won no conditions

 

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]Time is running out for the banks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had one S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) ignored (Dec 2004) and one partially fulfilled. They have deleted entries from their records - one of which is really dumb as I have a letter from them quoting their entry -

 

Just subscribing, good luck!

Donate to keep this site open

 

Any help or advice is offered as just that, help and advice without any liability. If in doubt consult a legal expert or CAB.

 

Make Cash Flow Forecast

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just subscribing, very similar case to my own so would like to stay tuned -good luck

TC

LSTB (business) S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) received 10th Dec prelim + Contractual interest claim sent 10th Jan07 £5k + change

Received partial reduction mount of £5,563 against loan & overdraft of £18k i.e. 30% reduction. Next step PPI's & managed loans. Jan 07

 

LSTB (Girlfriend) prelim sent 10th Jan07 1st account £670

Received partial refund into account of £457 9th Feb, sent rejection letter. donated 5% 10th Feb

LSTB (Girlfriend) prelim sent 10th Jan 07 £1,450

HSBC S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 27th DEC (approx £3000)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm only a few steps away from MCOL for 3 accounts too. Watching with interest.

Lloyds TSB (C.Acc) **WON - Fully Settled**

NatWest - £1367.96 - N1 Filed - AQ Compl

Lloyds TSB - Select Loan PPI - £4629.52 - N1 Filed - Settlement rejected

Lloyds TSB Credit Card - £373.48 - N1 Filed

MBNA Credit Card - £791.52 - N1 Filed

Capital One - £746.67 - N1 Filed -** Settlement awaited **

Halifax Credit Card - £836.12 - N1 Filed

Paragon Personal Finance - S.A.R 15/12/2006

Littlewoods - £834.43 - N1 Filed

Barclaycard - £1145.00 - N1 Filed

My Wife:

Natwest Current Account - £1197.98 - N1 Filed at Court

Capital One - £1150.94 - N1 Filed - **Settlement offer rejected **

Littlewoods - £1405.48 - N1 Filed

8-) PROUD TO BE DEALING WITH MY DEBTS! 8-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Right, time for an update:

 

LTSB sent me a nasty letter in December 2006 threatening court action over the £490.00 debt. I phoned Collections in Brighton and informed them of the situation. I said at that time that any moneyclaim filed against me will result in an immediate (10 minutes after receipt) counterclaim for over £21,000 including 3 breaches under the Data Protection Act, 3 breaches under the CCA and 1 count of theft, along with tampering with a computer system (not sure if this is just under the DPA or fraud as well). Bloke from LTSB wanted details of all of this, including evidence, but I told him no go. I also told him that I will file a moneyclaim for all of this anyway, when I get judgement on my counterclaim from the last moneyclaim they issued. LTSB has frozen action for a month pending further investigations (and we all know how thoroughly they investigate don't we!).

 

I hadn't received any response from my letter dated 11th December 2006 to Reading County Court asking for judgement on my counterclaim, so I called them on the 5th January 2007. The person I spoke to cited delays over the festive period and that the matter would be dealt with in a week or two. Yesterday I received the following response from the court:

 

'Upon reading a letter from the Defendant(s) dated 11th December 2006

 

WITHOUT NOTICE IT IS COMMENTED AND DIRECTED

 

- Any application for judgement on Counterclaim will have to be on notice, as the DETAILS of any order will have to be specified'

 

Now, if we go back a bit on this saga, I didn't send in any supporting documentation to the courts as LTSB ([problem]) failed to send in their AQ and I effectively won by default. Am I right in assuming the response from the court is an invitation to submit evidence? If this is so, what exactly do I need to send in? I've built up a few pieces from CAG, but a checklist (or pointers) would be greatly appreciated.

 

The saga continues to continue, but my sense of being wronged doesn't diminish

 

M55! You're a dark horse! Been posting on my MBNA thread, had no IDEA you had all this going on!! Crikey, I am going to need you I think, if you don't mind!

 

Any update on the situation now?

 

Love, Corn xxx:)

CLICK ON THE SCALES IF YOU THINK I HAVE HELPED!

 

I AM NOT SCARED ANYMORE!:rolleyes:

 

MBNA - To quote "The Carpenters", We've Only Just Begun..................;):D

HSBC - Settled.

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Goldfish - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Tesco - SAR issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, time for an update:

 

LTSB sent me a nasty letter in December 2006 threatening court action over the £490.00 debt. I phoned Collections in Brighton and informed them of the situation. I said at that time that any moneyclaim filed against me will result in an immediate (10 minutes after receipt) counterclaim for over £21,000 including 3 breaches under the Data Protection Act, 3 breaches under the CCA and 1 count of theft, along with tampering with a computer system (not sure if this is just under the Data Protection Act or fraud as well). Bloke from LTSB wanted details of all of this, including evidence, but I told him no go. I also told him that I will file a moneyclaim for all of this anyway, when I get judgement on my counterclaim from the last moneyclaim they issued. LTSB has frozen action for a month pending further investigations (and we all know how thoroughly they investigate don't we!).

 

I hadn't received any response from my letter dated 11th December 2006 to Reading County Court asking for judgement on my counterclaim, so I called them on the 5th January 2007. The person I spoke to cited delays over the festive period and that the matter would be dealt with in a week or two. Yesterday I received the following response from the court:

 

'Upon reading a letter from the Defendant(s) dated 11th December 2006

 

WITHOUT NOTICE IT IS COMMENTED AND DIRECTED

 

- Any application for judgement on Counterclaim will have to be on notice, as the DETAILS of any order will have to be specified'

 

Now, if we go back a bit on this saga, I didn't send in any supporting documentation to the courts as LTSB ([problem]) failed to send in their AQ and I effectively won by default. Am I right in assuming the response from the court is an invitation to submit evidence? If this is so, what exactly do I need to send in? I've built up a few pieces from CAG, but a checklist (or pointers) would be greatly appreciated.

 

The saga continues to continue, but my sense of being wronged doesn't diminish

 

M55! You're a dark horse! Been posting on my MBNA thread, had no IDEA you had all this going on!! Crikey, I am going to need you I think, if you don't mind!

 

Any update on the situation now?

 

Love, Corn xxx:)

CLICK ON THE SCALES IF YOU THINK I HAVE HELPED!

 

I AM NOT SCARED ANYMORE!:rolleyes:

 

MBNA - To quote "The Carpenters", We've Only Just Begun..................;):D

HSBC - Settled.

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Goldfish - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Tesco - SAR issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Corn, things have gone quiet. I've got Moorcroft hastling me and an issue with a GE Capital card (taking me to court) and my wranglings with MBNA - so Lloyds TSB are on the back burner. They are threatening to take me to court over £498.00, so - sod it, let them! (I'll go for the whole lot then).

 

Bankfodder was very helpful with the original LTSB stuff, I'm just kicking myself for just getting the default stuff done (that reminds me, I must phone the courts on Monday to see what the hell is going on).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Corn, things have gone quiet. I've got Moorcroft hastling me and an issue with a GE Capital card (taking me to court) and my wranglings with MBNA - so Lloyds TSB are on the back burner. They are threatening to take me to court over £498.00, so - sod it, let them! (I'll go for the whole lot then).

 

Bankfodder was very helpful with the original LTSB stuff, I'm just kicking myself for just getting the default stuff done (that reminds me, I must phone the courts on Monday to see what the hell is going on).

 

Bloody hell hun, enough going on???!!!! Give us a shout if you need an ear!! Keep us posted xx

CLICK ON THE SCALES IF YOU THINK I HAVE HELPED!

 

I AM NOT SCARED ANYMORE!:rolleyes:

 

MBNA - To quote "The Carpenters", We've Only Just Begun..................;):D

HSBC - Settled.

Capital One - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Goldfish - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued.

Tesco - SAR issued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi - had to respond on this - desperately trying to find out how Lloyds (b Horse) managed to take me to court and win (see other thread) with my evidence of their false data and behaviour, and no sight of my counter claim - even a second judge would not look at it so I'm really depressed about it, finding the bill higher now than the orig loan- good luck with this one!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

subscribing

You may think that but . . ......

____________________________________

Total repaid to date £1947.58

 

Lloyds Currrent a/c £745.27

Moneyclaim filed 17th June

Defence and AQ 25th July. Case struck out 11 Aug

reinstated and hearing 15th Jan 2007

 

Lloyds loan a/c D A request expired 19th June

Proceedings under S7 Data Protection Act issued 29th June defence and counterclaim 27 July

Hearing Jan 3 2007

Listed final hearing April 2007-

Judge declared an interest and disqualified himself

new date to be set

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...